After reading last week’s article about SDSU’s unwillingness to sign a commitment to take steps toward becoming green, I was nothing short of disappointed. All that the commitment required was to put a plan in place to decrease our carbon footprint within the next two years, along with a goal of decreasing emissions in 40 years. As a Sun Grant institution, our university is a leader in researching and using alternative bio-energy. At the same time, our leadership feels compelled to continue hauling “cheap” coal into the physical plant one truck-load at a time. I’m getting a few mixed signals.

Each of us knows the wind blows in Brookings, and capitalizing on this resource would be a simple way to clean up our act. I realize that it is not as simple as it seems to install wind turbines, but in my small town, Pipestone, Minn., the high school managed to do just that, and now wind powers the school and the school sells back the surplus energy, paying the investment off in only six years. I realize other efforts are taking place; however, it is the lack of commitment that frustrates me the most. It is my hope that in 40 years SDSU will have decided unrenewable resources will run out and steps will have been taken to cut the ties. Should we live in the present while coal is cost effective or plan for the future when the coal is gone? Signing a commitment to hold ourselves accountable for being part of the solution seems to be the best plan, and I hope my soon-to-be alma mater acts on it.

Tori BoomgaardenSenior, Dairy Manufacturing